Author: Una Ebsworth
Practice area: fraud offences
Una is a Director at Doogue + George, recognised by Doyle's Guide as a Preeminent Criminal Defence Lawyer in Victoria (2026) and an LIV Accredited Criminal Law Specialist since 2014 with over 15 years of experience in serious indictable matters. Her depth of experience in this area means clients receive accurate, considered advice.
View full profile →Una authored this content and last revised it for accuracy on 6 August 2026.
What is the offence of Obtaining Property By Deception?
Obtaining Property By Deception is a serious Victorian fraud offence under section 81 of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic). It criminalises dishonest conduct involving deception to secure property from another person. It is classified as an indictable offence carrying substantial penalties.
Key points
- Legal elements: Obtaining property belonging to another, by deception, dishonestly, with intent to permanently deprive.
- Type of conduct: False representations or deceptive conduct used to gain ownership, possession or control of property.
- Court process: Indictable offence but most often dealt in the Magistrates’ Court.
The maximum penalty for Obtaining Property By Deception is 10 years imprisonment.
Common defences may include absence of intent to permanently deprive, lack of knowledge that a representation was false, factual dispute, duress, wrongful identification, mental impairment, honest and reasonable mistake or belief, and necessity.
Have you been accused of Obtaining Property By Deception? You should arrange a time to speak with one of our experienced defence lawyers to receive important strategic advice.
Police Interview
Have police requested that you come down to the station for ‘a chat’? Do you know what that actually means? If police suspect that you have committed the offence of Obtaining Property by Deception, ‘a chat’ usually means that when you attend the police station, you will be placed under arrest and formally interviewed about the allegations.
Our experienced criminal lawyers will explain this process to you before you go to the police station so that nothing is a surprise. Our lawyers will also provide you with clear advice about whether it is in your best interests to answer police questions, or to exercise your right to silence. If you are concerned or nervous about going through the interview process alone, our lawyers can attend the interview with you to ensure that your rights are protected.
Pleading Not Guilty
Police make mistakes in their investigations, and people are charged with offences that they have not committed. If you are defending a charge of Obtaining Property by Deception, it is important that you engage an experienced criminal lawyer to represent you at an early stage in the proceedings.
Our expert lawyers will thoroughly analyse the brief of evidence in your matter for police errors and omissions, and provide you with clear advice about the legal defences available to you. We will ensure that you understand each step in the Court process as we provide the best possible legal representation to fight the charge against you.
Pleading Guilty
Pleading guilty to Obtaining Property by Deception is a serious matter. It is important to seek advice from an experienced criminal lawyer so you fully understand the potential consequences of your plea. Our lawyers will clearly explain the implications of accepting the charge and outline the possible outcomes in court.
We will work closely with you to prepare your case thoroughly in advance of the plea hearing and advocate strongly on your behalf to achieve the best possible outcome.
Sentencing
Sentencing in the higher courts of Victoria
Source: Sentencing Advisory Council of Victoria (SACStat), Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) s 81(1) — 521 charges across 56 cases, higher courts, 1 July 2019 – 30 June 2024.
| Outcome | % |
|---|---|
| Imprisonment | 73.5% |
| Community Correction Order | 13.6% |
| Other | 11.3% |
| Fine | 1.0% |
| Youth Justice Centre Order | 0.6% |
The data indicates a strong likelihood of a custodial sentence at this level, generally reflecting more serious or large-scale deception offences. When determining penalty, the court will consider factors such as the value of the property obtained, the level of planning involved, prior history and any restitution made. Careful preparation and experienced advocacy are important where imprisonment is a substantial risk.
Sentencing in the Magistrates’ Court of Victoria
Source: Sentencing Advisory Council of Victoria (SACStat), Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) s 81(1) — 21,589 charges across 5,016 cases, Magistrates’ Court, 1 July 2020 – 30 June 2023.
| Outcome | % |
|---|---|
| Imprisonment | 46.2% |
| Community Correction Order | 24.7% |
| Adjourned Undertaking | 13.6% |
| Fine | 11.1% |
| Other | 3.7% |
| Discharge/Dismissal | 0.8% |
These figures demonstrate that imprisonment is a real risk, although courts also frequently impose community-based supervision or financial penalties depending on the circumstances. The sentence will depend on the value involved, the level of dishonesty and the offender’s personal history. Early legal advice can help achieve the best possible outcome.
Which Court Will the Case be Heard in?
Obtaining property by deception is an indictable offence. This means that it may be heard in the higher courts. However it is most often dealt with in the Magistrates’ Court. The seriousness of the circumstances surrounding the charge will determine in what jurisdiction the matter is heard.
Generally a single charge of obtaining property by deception is heard in the Magistrates’ Court. If the value of the goods exceeds $100,000.00 or if it is attached to more serious dishonesty charges, it goes to the higher courts. The circumstances surrounding your charges will determine which Court is appropriate. Our solicitors can provide you with advice in relation to this.
The elements
There are four elements that constitute the offence of Obtaining Property By Deception:
Element 1: The accused obtained property belonging to another;
Element 2: The accused did so with the intention of permanently depriving the other of the property;
The jury or Magistrate must consider the accused’s state of mind at the time when the property was obtained. If the accused had an intention to permanently deprive the owner of the property at that time then this element will be satisfied, even if the accused later decided to return the property.4If the accused only had an intention to temporarily deprive the owner of his or her property, this element will not be met. He or she must have already formed the intention to permanently deprive the owner of the property at the time it was obtained.
If the Accused obtains property and is intending to return equivalent but not identical property, they will have an intention to permanently deprive the owner of the property.5
Element 3: The accused used deceit to obtain the property;
The third element of Obtaining Property By Deception requires the accused to have obtained the property by deceit.6 If the property is obtained without any deception, no offence is committed.The deception must cause the obtaining. Any deception, whether deliberate or reckless, includes an act, thing done, omitted to be done or representation that is the casual link for obtaining the financial advantage. A deception may take place where the Accused does or omits to do something with the intention of causing a computer system or machine to make a response that the accused is not authorised to cause the computer system to make.7
Examples of this include:
- A person who obtains property by using a cheque which is subsequently dishonoured, and which he or she knows does not have the requisite funds.
- Manipulation of an automatic teller machine (ATM) to make an unauthorised response.
Element 4: The accused obtained the property dishonestly.
Defences
The offence of obtaining property by deception can raise legal issues in relation to the intention of the accused. If a jury considers that it is reasonably possible that the Accused did not intend to permanently deprive the owner of the pr
operty deceitfully obtained, the offence is not made out. This is the same for an intention to temporarily deprive. The requisite intention to permanently deprive must be present.
Lack of knowledge is also a defence available to the charge if the accused did not have knowledge that their representation by words or conduct was false or probably false at the time it was made. In determining this part of the element, a jury must be satisfied that the Accused him or herself knew, or knew of the likelihood that the representation was untrue. The objective reasonable person test is not applied in this instance.
Other defences available include factual dispute, duress, wrongful identification, mental impairment, honest and reasonable mistake or belief or necessity may apply.
In a trial, the questions a judge will ask the jury to consider are:
- Did the accused obtain property that belonged to another person?
(Consider – Did the accused obtain ownership, possession or control of property belonging to another person?)
If yes, then go to 2.
If no, then the accused is not guilty of obtain property by deception. - Did the accused intend to permanently deprive another person of that property?
(Consider – Did the accused intend that the owner would never get the property back?)
If yes, then go to 3.
If no, then the accused is not guilty of obtaining property by deception. - Did the accused obtain property by deception?
3.1 Did the accused make a false representation?
(Consider – Did the accused make the representation alleged by the prosecution. Was that representation false when it was made?)
If yes, then go to 3.2.
If no, then the accused is not guilty of obtaining property by deception.
3.2 At the time of making the representation, did the accused know that the representation was false, or that it was probably false?
If yes, then go to 3.3.
If no, then the accused is not guilty of obtaining property by deception.
3.3 Did the accused intend that the false representation would be acted upon?
If yes, then go to 3.4.
If no, then the accused is not guilty of obtaining property by deception.
3.4 Did the accused obtain the property as a result of making the false representation?
(Consider – Did the false representation cause a relevant person to give the accused ownership, possession or control of the property?)
If yes, then go to 4.
If no, then the accused is not guilty of obtaining property by deception. - Did the accused obtain the property dishonestly?
(Consider – Has the prosecution proved that the accused did not believe that he/she had a legal right to obtain the property?)
If yes, then the accused is guilty of obtaining property by deception (as long as you have also answered Yes to questions 1, 2 and 3).
If no, then the accused is not guilty of obtaining property by deception.
Maximum penalty for section 81 of the Crimes Act 1958
The offence of Obtaining Property By Deception (s81 of the Crimes Act 1958) carries a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment. However the maximum term of imprisonment that can be imposed in the Magistrates’ Court for a single offence is two years. Further, the maximum aggregate total sentence that can be imposed in the Magistrates’ Court is five years.
The seriousness of the conduct engaged in will be determined by the court by reference to the value of the property, the sophistication of the deceptive scheme and time frame of the offending, among other things. The facts surrounding your matter will allow our solicitors to advise you of likely outcomes.
Check out some of the criminal cases we’ve defended in court involving the offence of Obtaining Property By Deception:
FAQ about Obtaining Property By Deception
Does the prosecution have to prove intent to permanently deprive?
Can someone be guilty if the property was obtained for another person?
What qualifies as “property” under this offence?
Which court hears charges of obtaining property by deception?
Is lack of knowledge that a representation was false a defence?
Can obtaining property by deception apply to intangible assets or financial interests?
[1] Section 81(2) of the Act.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Section 71(1) of the Act.
[4] R v Jost (2002) 135 A Crim R 202 (Vic CA).
[5] R v Williams [1953] 1 QB 660; R v Cockburn [1968] 1 All ER 466; R v Pace [1965] 3 Can CC 55 (NSSC) cited in Criminal Charge Book, 7.5.2.1.1 – Bench notes: Obtaining Property by Deception (21 October 2013) Judicial College of Victoria: <http://www.judicialcollege.vic.edu.au/eManuals/CCB/index.htm#30703.htm>.
[6] As “deception” has the same meaning in relation to the offence of obtaining a financial advantage by deception as it does for the offence of obtaining property by deception (section 82(2) of the Act), cases decided in relation to that offence will be applicable to section 81 of the Act.
[7] Section 81(4)(b) of the Act.
[8] R v Salvo [1980] VR 401; Pollard v Cth DPP (1992) 28 NSWLR 659).
[9] Ibid.
